Business Jet Tailplane and Engine Locations

Light Business Jet Tailplane location (cbar) Engine location (cbar) Height of nacelle centre
wing CR/4 to tailplane CR/4 wing CR/4 to nacelle line above fuselage bottom
leading edge over fuselage diameter (h/d)
Cessna Citation CJ1 3.22 (T-tail) 0.59 (overlaps with wing) 0.76
Raytheon Premier 1 3.35 (T-tail) 1.17 0.71
Sino Swearingen SJ30-2 3.61 (T-tail) 1.39 0.75
Eclipse 500 3.38 (T-tail) 1.85 0.78
Safire S-26 3.53 (low fin mounted) 0.59 (overlaps with wing) 0.59
(data calculated using data and general arrangement drawings from 2002/2003 edition
of Jane’s All The World’s Aircraft)
The table above shows the tailplane and engine locations for five light/entry level
business jets. Deciding what is the best location for the tailplane is complicated
because the decision is affected by the wing location and planform parameters, and in
the case of business jets, the engine size and location as well. Tailplane locations can
be divided into two categories, fin-mounted tailplanes (including t-tails) and body-
mounted tailplanes i.e. tailplanes mounted on the rear tail cone.
Fin-mounted Tailplanes
Pros
 Improved fin efficiency due to the tailplane acting as an endplate resulting in a
more uniform pressure distribution along the fin’s span.
 With t-tails there is improved tailplane efficiency due to the tailplane being
located outside the wing downwash field. According to ESDU item 80020 the
downwash gradient d/d decreases linearly with tailplane height above the
wing/body/nacelle combination no lift line. If ET is the ratio of the installed
tailplane lift curve slope to the free undisturbed flow tailplane lift curve slope,
then according to ESDU item 89029 fin-mounted tailplanes can have ET = 1.0
provided that the tailplane is high enough above the wing/body/nacelle
combination no lift line.
 T-tails also have good spin recovery characteristics since not part of the fin can be
blanketed by the tailplane wake with the tailplane on top of fin.
 Fin-mounted tailplanes are likely to be located outside the trouble zone (see figure
below) that is blanketed by the wake from the wing during take-off and landing.
Cons
 Longitudinal stability and handling becomes inter-related to the lateral stability
and handling, and so efforts to improve one may have unforeseen and undesirable
effects on the other.
 The fin must be strengthened to carry the loads generated by the tailplane and
elevator, including any rolling moment due to asymmetric tail loading, which can
be quite large.
 The resulting increase in structural weight from the point above makes it harder to
meet the longitudinal static stability requirements as well the longitudinal tip-over
criterion. These requirements are already hard enough to meet on business jets
with their rear-mounted engines.
 Drag on the tailplane in cruise flight is significant and so with a tailplane mounted
high on the fin or a t-tail, there is a significant nose-up pitching moment resulting
from the drag on the tailplane in cruise flight.
 The business jet market is already saturated with t-tail clones and a fin-mounted
tailplane would not be any different.
Body-mounted Tailplanes
Pros
 Careful positioning of the tailplane on the tail cone can ensure that the
longitudinal stability and handling is not related to the lateral stability and
handling, making it possible for both to be optimised.
 The arrangement has the minimum structural weight because no additional
structural reinforcement for the fin is required.
 The point above also means that it is easier to meet the longitudinal static stability
requirements and also the longitudinal tip-over criterion as well.
 Careful positioning of the tailplane on the tail cone i.e. having the tailplane located
aft of the fin, can also ensure that this arrangement has spin recovery
characteristics at least as good as those of a t-tail.
 The tailplane much is closer the centre of gravity, so the drag on the tailplane in
cruise flight does not cause such a significant nose up pitching moment.
 According to ESDU item 80020 the downwash gradient d/d decreases with
distance from the wing along the wing/body/nacelle combination no lift line.
Body-mounted tailplanes should benefit from this fact more than fin-mounted
tailplanes because they can be moved further aft along the wing/body/nacelle
combination no lift line.
 Using a different aerofoil section for the tailplane can compensate for any losses
in tailplane efficiency due to interference from the body. Ultimately, as far a
longitudinal static stability is concerned, the most important parameter is the
pitching moment due the tailplane not the lift due to the tailplane. Therefore, any
losses in tailplane efficiency can be compensated for by increasing the tail arm,
which is much easier to do with a body-mounted tailplane than with a fin-mounted
tailplane.
 Having a body-mounted fin could a useful unique selling point considering that
this business jet has to compete in a market already full of business jets with fin-
mounted tailplanes.
Cons
 Tailplane efficiency will not be as good because the tailplane will probably be
inside the wing downwash field. Also, according to ESDU item 89029, with
careful positioning body-mounted tailplanes can have a maximum ET of only 0.9
because of body interference effects.
 It is harder to position the tailplane relative to the engines in order to prevent
excessive heat from the engines reaching the tailplane. Although this does not
seem to be a problem for business jets such as the IAI Gulfstream 200, which has
the tailplane positioned extremely close its engines.
 Body-mounted tailplanes are more likely to be located inside the trouble zone (see
figure below) that is blanketed by the wake from the wing during take-off and
landing. However, this problem can be solved by having a lower down wing as on
the Raytheon Premier 1 or by having a higher mid-mounted wing as on the
Visionaire VA-10 Vantage.
Engine Location
 As mentioned above, the engines need to be positioned far enough away from the
tailplane so that excessive heat from them does not reach the tailplane.
 The engines need to be located as far forward as possible in order to help meet the
longitudinal static stability requirements as well as the longitudinal tip-over
criterion.
 Also, the engines need to be located as far forward as possible to ensure they are
in clean air and are not blanketed by the fuselage wake as they were on the Eclipse
500. Redesign work, including increasing the size of the horizontal engine pylons
and reshaping of the tail cone, had to be done on the Eclipse 500 to solve that
problem.
 Locating the engines forward so that their leading edge is near the wing trailing
edge can actually boost wing lift and hence the lift to drag ratio because of the
suction provided by the engines.
 In the vertical direction, the engines need to be located so that the thrust line is as
close to the centre of gravity as possible. This minimises the contribution of the
engine thrust, which is a variable, to the pitching moment experienced by the
aircraft. If the thrust line is a long way above the centre of gravity, then during the
take-off this will cause a large nose-down pitching moment, making it hard to
rotate the nose-wheel off the ground and hence a large, heavy elevator will be
required. During cruise the same large nose-down pitching moment will the
tailplane will have to set at a relatively large negative incidence to trim the
aircraft, increasing the induced drag. If there are engine failures, the drag on the
dead engine(s) will cause a large nose-up pitching moment and in this situation if
an inexperienced pilot allowed the nose to rise then the wings could stall.
Significant changes in the aircraft’s pitch attitude would also be experienced as
the pilot changes the thrust level. For the preliminary business jet design, the
engines should be place so that the nacelle centre line coincides with the fuselage
centre line i.e. h/d = 0.5.
In conclusion it must be said that fin-mounted tailplanes have some aerodynamic
advantages while body mounted tailplanes have some structural weight and centre of
gravity advantages. Body mounted tailplanes also offer greater design freedom. It is
the personal belief of the author that the advantages of fin-mounted tailplanes do not
outweigh their disadvantages and that a body mounted tailplane should be chosen.